Recent blog entries by nuncanada

Actually in the model the observers will agree on velocity
as percentage of light speed.
The difference comes from acceleration. There is a
prefered "absolute 0 velocity", and the observer that is
closer to it will have its time going faster than the
other.

From General Relativity these observers observations
should be simmetric.

If we were to measure Gravity's contribution in towers in
both poles they should not agree...

Dynamic Programming is a nice general procedure to
attack some specific exponential algorithms and reduce them
to polynomial time. But beware, they aren't usually created
taking in mind the symmetries of the problem in question, so
they may leave a lot to desire to come close to a algorithm
designed with the given problem in mind.

So for instance, matrix
chain multiplication which is a textbook example for
dynamic programming will give out a O(n^3) algorithm. There
are much better algorithms for this problem out there,
specifically a O(n*log n) one.

* I believe formal methods (typed lambda calculus, example:
Coq) is
the path for the future of programming, not all the fashion
industry
that comes from Software Engineering and business.

* I believe deep down time is discrete (maybe because i have
been
programming since being 6 years old, and that scrambled my
head to
disbelieve the continuum?). Even being a maverick in math and
physics during school i never liked geometry, I felt
uncomfortable
with continuity since early on.

* I believe democracy with capitalism and inheritance has
always failed, its
inefficiency and unfairness in all levels is just absurd.
There must
be a better social arrangement, and merit has to play a big
part of
it, not which family you grew into.

* I haven't been able to make myself believe that the
discrete logarithm problem doesn't have a polynomial
solution. Didn't find an algorithm but the problem just
seems to have too much "symmetry".

Almost everyone is unaware but the seeds of change have been
planted! To a better open source community we are going to!
Open Source is a lot of times regarded as an example of
Meritocracy in action, but if you read Amartya
Sen's article
about Meritocracy, you will recognize that most of Open
Source projects fit more in his description of a 'static'
meritocracy than a 'dynamic' one (my words to resume his
thoughts), and Sen shows how what should be regarded as a
real meritocracy is the dynamic qualities.
To our rescue comes the knight in his shinning armor, not
other than the famous Linus Torvalds! I guess most readers
think i am crazy by now, but keep up and maybe it will make
sense.
DVCS have been around longer than git but not only by
creating a functional open source DVCS, but by evangelizing
the benefits of a distributed system he has planted the
seeds
that will change the future (interestingly for all the
democracy and meritocracy fanatics, this necessity came from
a "dictatorship").
And GitHub is sign of
the changes to come, once oss developers start to rethink
forking not as deviating from the community but as a common
fact of producing software, the whole community structure
will change!
No longer the "core group" will have the overwhelming power,
nor will it matter much, probably such a notion will end up
existing mostly. We will have the real possibility for the
community to choose what to follow from whom, github is a
start in that direction.
I am waiting anxiously for the future, a dynamicly
meritocratic one for OSS.